The DOI matches its Crossref record; 75 of the 75 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Actor-Network Theory, organizations and critique: towards a politics of organizing
Abstract
In recent years the approach to social theory known as Actor-Network Theory (ANT) has been adopted within a range of social science fields. Despite its popularity, ANT is considered a controversial approach in that it appears to promote a sociological perspective that lacks substantive political critique. This is argued to be particularly true in ANT’s ‘translations’ in management and organization studies (MOS). In this article, we argue that the ‘ANT and After’ literature offers the potential to develop such a political critique. In particular we suggest it presents the opportunity to develop an approach that de-naturalizes organization(s), has the ability to deliver critical performativity, and at the same time offer a reflexive approach to management and organizational knowledge. Using organizational examples, we argue that ANT and After can offer insights relevant to the development of a critical perspective on MOS, notably through its advocacy of a ‘political ontology’ of organizing.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory
Latour, B. (2005) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199256044.001.0001 · Cited by 16,778
Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989) · Social Studies of Science · doi:10.1177/030631289019003001 · Cited by 10,847
Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society
Bijker, W. E., & Latour, B. (1988) · Technology and Culture · doi:10.2307/3105094 · Cited by 10,767
Callon, M. (1984) · The Sociological Review · doi:10.1111/j.1467-954x.1984.tb00113.x · Cited by 7,763
Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor‐network‐theory
Turnbull, J. (2008) · New Zealand Geographer · doi:10.1111/j.1745-7939.2008.00151_4.x · Cited by 7,617
Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature
McNeil, M., & Haraway, D. J. (1992) · Feminist Review · doi:10.2307/1395245 · Cited by 6,794
Why has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern
Latour, B. (2004) · Critical Inquiry · doi:10.1086/421123 · Cited by 5,595
Braverman, H. (1974) · Monthly Review · doi:10.14452/mr-026-03-1974-07_1 · Cited by 5,505
Pandora's Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies
Casper, M. J., & Latour, B. (2000) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2655272 · Cited by 5,049
The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice
Mol, A. (2002) · doi:10.1215/9780822384151 · Cited by 4,381
Cited by
Tomczak, P. (2016) · doi:10.4324/9781315641423 · Cited by 97
The state of affairs: Critical performativity and the online dating industry
Roscoe, P., & Chillas, S. (2014) · Organization · doi:10.1177/1350508413485497 · Cited by 57
Metadata
- Authors
- Alcadipani, R., & Hassard, J.
- Venue
- Organization
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010-05-04
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 419-435
- ISSN
- 1350-5084 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7323
- OpenAlex
- W2097037193
- Cited by
- 294
- References
- 75
- FWCI
- 59.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Actor-Network Theory, organizations and critique: towards a politics of organizing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1350508410364441
- The paper
- Alcadipani, R., & Hassard, J. (2010). Actor-Network Theory, organizations and critique: towards a politics of organizing. Organization. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508410364441
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.